Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol 3, No 10, 2012

55

Relationship between personality traits, spiritual intelligence and

well being in university students

Sarita Sood* Arti Bakhshi Richa Gupta

P G Department of Psychology, University of Jammu, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir-180006, India

* E-mail of the corresponding author: sarita.sood@yahoo.com

Abstract

Objective: This research was carried out to explore the relationship between personality traits, spiritual

intelligence and well being among university students. Method: Big Five Factor Inventory by Rammstedt and

John was employed to assess personality traits, Spiritual Intelligence Scale of King (SISRI -24) to measure

spiritual intelligence and WHO-Five Well-being Index (WHO-5) to measure well being of 120 students doing

post graduation in Psychology from the University of Jammu (N=50) and Indira Gandhi National Open

University (N=70). The mean age of the sample was 24.79. Independent samples t test was employed to assess

the difference in personality traits and spiritual intelligence in students from two universities. Data was subjected

to correlation and regression analysis.Results: Differences in personality traits and spiritual intelligence emerged

in this study. Positive relationship was found between personal meaning production and two factors namely

agreeableness and neuroticism. Significant relationship appeared between transcendental awareness and

openness. Regression analysis revealed that transcendental awareness predicted well being. Conclusion: To

further enhance the well being steps should be taken to develop and strengthen transcendental awareness in

students.

Keywords: Personality traits, Spiritual Intelligence, Well Being, Students

1. Introduction

Well being refers to physical, mental and emotional health of an individual. It enables an individual to thrive and

flourish. Gough and McGregor (2007) defines well being as something that people are notionally able to do and

to be, and what they have actually been able to do and to be. It is more than the absence of illness or pathology.

These aspects of well being are integral part of students and their learning processes (Wang, Haertel, & Walberg,

1997). Well being of student depends on growth and integration of five areas into balanced whole namely

physical, mental, emotional, social and spiritual (Masters, 2004). It is important to enhance well being of young

people as the students despite of low levels of health and wellbeing have to overcome enormous obstacles to

experience success from their education for which they have to feel well within (Marshall, 2004).

Spiritual intelligence is the way we assign meaning and feel connected to the power of larger than

ourselves. Spiritual intelligence is one of the several types of intelligence that can be developed independently

and contributes to psychological well being and overall healthy human development (Vaughan, 2003). Spiritual

intelligence is a set of adaptive mental capacities based on non-material and transcendent aspects of reality (King

& Teresa, 2009). The four components of spiritual intelligence are critical existential thinking, personal meaning

production, transcendental awareness and conscious state expansion. Critical existential thinking is best

described as the capacity an individual to critically contemplate meaning, purpose, and other

existential/metaphysical issue; to come to original existential conclusions or philosophies; and to contemplate

non-existential issues in relation to one’s existence. An ability to derive personal meaning and purpose from all

physical and mental experiences, including the capacity to create and master a life purpose is regarded as

personal meaning production. Transcendental awareness is the capacity to identify transcendent

dimensions/patterns of the self, of others, and of the physical world during normal states of consciousness,

accompanied by the capacity to identify their relationship to one’s self and to the physical world. Conscious

State Expansion is defined as an ability to enter and exit higher/spiritual states of consciousness at one’s own

discretion. Significant relationship between spiritual intelligence and mental health has been reported in previous

studies (Emmons, 2000; Noble, 2000). Spiritual intelligence and its components can be used to enhance mental

health (West, 2004).

Personality is an important determinant factor for well being (Gilovich & Eibach, 2001). Review of

literature reflects that numerous studies have been conducted showing an association between well being and the

two personality traits namely extraversion and neuroticism (Diener, 2000; Diener & Lucas, 1999; Libran, 2006;

Vittesera, 2001; Wismijer & van Assen, 2008). On the other hand, based on meta analysis, opposite trend has

been reported by DeNeve and Cooper (1998) suggesting that well being and these two traits are not strongly

associated and rather traits such as agreeableness and conscientiousness are associated with well being. In terms

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol 3, No 10, 2012

56

of Big Five factors neuroticism and extraversion are found to be strong predictors of spiritual intelligence

(Amrai, Farahani, Ebrahimi, & Bagherian, 2011; Hoossein, Ahmad, & Elham, 2012).

The aim of the present study is to explore the relationship between personality traits with reference to Big

Five personality dimensions (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness and

Conscientiousness) along with spiritual intelligence (critical existential thinking, personal meaning production,

transcendental awareness and conscious state explanation) and well being.

2. Method

2.1 Sample

The sample consisted of 120 students enrolled in post graduate program in University of Jammu and Indira

Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), Jammu Study Centre. Participants ranged in age from 20 to 45 with

a mean age of 24.8. Of these 50 of 120 (42%) were from the university of Jammu and 70 of 120 (58%) were

from IGNOU. Of the total sample, 53 percent (107 of 120) were male and 47% (97 of 120) were female. Twenty

three percent of participants (n = 28) were married and 77 % (n=92) were single. Students working or employed

accounted for 25 percent of the sample.

2.2 Procedure

Data was gathered from the students of 1st year and 2

nd year doing post graduation in Psychology. At the onset

the students were clearly told about the purpose of research and confidentiality was assured. Consent of all the

students was sought and tools were administered in the form of booklet. Data was interpreted individually as

well as collectively. The obtained data was subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS 17 and results were

obtained.

232 Measures

Big five personality traits were assessed using a ten item short version of Big Five Inventory (Rammstedt &

John, 2007). Participants rated the items on a 5-point scale (1 = disagree strongly, 5 = agree strongly). The scale

consists of one true scored and one false scored item for each factor. The range of scores is 10 to 50.

To measure well being, WHO-Five Well-being Index (WHO-5) developed by Psychiatric Research Unit,

World Health Organization (1998) was used. It includes positive worded items only covering positive mood,

vitality, and general interests. It is on 6-point scale (0= at no time, 5=all the time). Total possible score ranges

from 0 to 25. Total score of 13 and below indicates poor well being.

Spiritual Intelligence Self Report Inventory (SISRI-24) of King (2008) was used to assess spiritual

intelligence. After reverse coding item number six scores are obtained ranging from 0 to 96. It comprises of

four subscales namely critical existential thinking (CET), personal meaning production (PMP), transcendental

awareness (TA), and conscious state expansion (CSE). Higher scores represent higher level of spiritual

intelligence and also each capacity.

3. Results and Discussion

Table 1 represents mean and standard deviation of students on personality traits, spiritual intelligence and well

being scores. It clearly shows results of t test for personality traits, spiritual intelligence (and its subscales) and

well being, among students of University of Jammu and IGNOU. Results from independent samples t test

indicate that there are meaningful differences between students from two universities on agreeableness and

conscientiousness. The students from two universities differed on three sub dimensions of spiritual intelligence.

The students from IGNOU are higher on both the traits. The students from IGNOU show higher on CET, PMP,

and CSE than those from University of Jammu. However no significant difference is found on scores for well

being between the students of two universities.

Table 2 represents correlation matrix of Big Five personality traits, spiritual intelligence and well being. It

shows that there is a positive meaningful correlation between conscientiousness and well being (p<0.01).

Conscientiousness was found to be positively associated with well being in previous studies as well (DeNeve &

Cooper, 1998; Steel, Schmidt, & Shutz, 2008). Neuroticism has negative association with well being indicating

that with increase in neuroticism score there is decrease in well being. Similar findings were obtained in studies

by (DeNeve & & Cooper, 1998; Diener, 2000; George, 1984; Vittesera, 2001; Wismijer & van Assen, 2008).

The sub dimension of spiritual intelligence PMP is positively related to agreeableness showing that those high on

this trait are also likely to be high on PMP. Positive association of agreeableness and spiritual intelligence are in

line with previous studies (Beshlideh, Charkhabi, Kalkhoran, & Marashi, 2011). The negative correlation is

evident in neuroticism and PMP revealing those high on neuroticism reflect low PMP. Negative relationship

between neuroticism and spiritual intelligence was also revealed in a study on university students (Amrai,

Farahani, Ebrahimi, & Bagherian, 2011; Hossein, Ahmad, & Elham, 2012). TA is also negatively associated

with openness. The CSE is positively related with conscientiousness.

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol 3, No 10, 2012

57

Full model with all possible predictor variables was employed for regression analysis. Undjusted R for the

data is .415 and R2 is .172. All the variables in combination (Significant F change = .03) predict well being of

the students. The full model is statistically significant (f=2.04, df=11,108, sig =.031). Inspection of the

coefficient table reveals that conscientiousness β =.249 is significant at 0.01 level and TA is also significant at

.05 level with β value .293 (Table 3). The regression weight for conscientiousness in full model is .249. It is

significantly predicting the well being meaning higher the conscientiousness higher will be the well being of the

students. These findings are in line with previous studies (Hayes & Joseph, 2003). Opposite trend is noticed for

TA predicting well being to be higher with decrease in TA.

4. Conclusion

The main purpose of the study was to find out association between Big Five personality traits, spiritual

intelligence and well being and to explain the role of personality traits and spiritual intelligence in university

students. Findings of the study suggest that conscientiousness should be regarded as main predictor of well being

in university level students. Difference in certain aspects in students from two types of universities has emerged

out of this study. A comparison of the students studying through open system with those studying in the

university following regular mode for imparting education reflects that the students from University of Jammu

are lower on agreeableness and conscientiousness as well as on all the subcomponents of spiritual intelligence

except TA. As TA is negatively predicting well being of students, further research should be carried out to

explore into the causes of this negative trend. The findings of the study are restricted to students doing post

graduation in psychology so it needs to be confirmed through carrying out more studies while considering the

students from various departments of both universities. Future studies may focus on finding out the causes of

lower scores on spiritual intelligence in students studying through regular mode.

References

Amrai, K., Farahani, A., Ebrahimi, M., & Bagherian, V. (2011). Relationship between personality traits and

spiritual intelligence among university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 15, 609-612.

Beshlideh, K., Charkhabi, M, Kalkhoran, M. A. N., & Marashi, S-A. (2011). Relationship between personality

traits and spiritual intelligence in male students of Shahid Chamran University at Ahvaz. Retrieved on April 13,

2012 from http://iranpa.org/Portal/default.aspx?tabid=406&ArticleId=338

Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American

Psychologist, 55, 34–43.

Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N.

Schwarz (Eds.), Wellbeing: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York: Sage

Foundation.

DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and

subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229.

Emmons, R. A. (2000). Spirituality and intelligence: Problems and prospects. The International Journal for the

Psychology of Religion, 10(1), 57-64.

George, L. K. (1984). Physician and self rating of health, neuroticism and subjective well being among men and

women. Personality and Individual Differences, 5(5), 533-539.

Gilovich, T., & Eibach, R. (2001). The fundamental attribution error where it really counts. Psychological

Inquiry, 12(1), 23–26.

Gough, I., & McGregor, J. (2007). Wellbeing in developing countries: from theory to research: Cambridge

University Press.

Hayes, N., & Joseph, S. (2003). Big 5 correlates of three dimensions of subjective well-being. Personality and

Individual Differences, 34(4), 723-727.

Hossein, Z., Ahmad, P., & Elham, S. (2012). Predictors of students spiritual intelligence by their personality

characteristics. Journal of Research in Behavioural Sciences, 10(1), 59-68.

King, D. B. (2008). Rethinking claims of spiritual intelligence: A definition, model, and measure. Unpublished

Master’s Thesis, Trent University, Petreborough, Ontario, Canada.

King, D. B., & Teresa L. D. (2009). A viable model and self-report measure of spiritual intelligence. The

International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 28, 68-85.

Libran, E. C. (2006). Personality dimensions and subjective well being. The Spanish Journal of Psychology,

9(1), 38-44.

Marshall, S. (2004). Strengthening learning through a focus on wellbeing. Paper presented in Conference on

Support Student Wellbeing, 24-26 October 2004, Australia. Retrieved on March 12, 2012 from

http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/-RC2004_Proceedings_001.pdf

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol 3, No 10, 2012

58

Masters, G. (2004). Conceptualising and researching student wellbeing.Paper presented in Conference on

Support Student Wellbeing, 24-26 October 2004, Australia. Retrieved on March 12, 2012 from

http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/RC2004_Proceedings_001.pdf

Noble, K. (2000). Spiritual intelligence: A new frame of mind. Advanced Development, 9, 1-29.

Psychiatric Research Unit, World Health Organization (1998). Well-being Index. Available at

http://www.cure4you.dk/354/WHO-5_English.pdf

Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: 10-item short version of Big

Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of research in Personality, 41, 203-2012.

Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective

well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138–161

Vaughan, F. (2002). What is Spiritual Intelligence? Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 42, (2), 16-33.

Vittersa, J. (2001). Personality traits and subjective well-being: Emotional stability, not extraversion, is probably

the most important predictor. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 903–914.

Wang , M. C., Haertel, G. D. & Walberg, H. J. (1997). Learning Influences. In H. J. Walberg & G. D. Haertel

(Eds.), Psychology and Educational Practice. Berkeley CA: McCatchan.

West, W. (2004). Spiritual issues in therapy: Relating experience to practice. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke.

Wismeijer, A., & van Asssen, M. (2008). Do neuroticism and extraversion explain the negative association

between self concealment and subjective well being. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 345-349.

Table 1 Comparison of Personality Traits, Spiritual Intelligence (with sub components), and Well Being between

Students from Two Universities

Variable University of Jammu

(n=50)

IGNOU (n=70)

Mean S. D. Mean S. D. t-value

Personality Trait

Extraversion 6.22 1.84 6.67 1.55 1.44

Agreeableness 7.16 1.88 8.12 1.53 3.07**

Conscientiousness 6.54 1.47 7.17 1.45 2.33*

Neuroticism 6.20 1.79 5.87 1.97 .93

Openness 6.38 1.17 6.61 1.20 1.05

Spiritual Intelligence

CET 13.52 4.05 15.47 4.99 2.27**

PMP 12.30 3.31 13.95 3.50 2.61**

TA 16.32 3.67 17.54 4.30 1.62

CSE 10.30 3.47 11.78 3.87 2.16*

Overall SI 59.54 59.48 58.55 12.32 0.13

Well Being 16.22 3.97 14.94 5.18 .46

*significant at .05 level **significant at .01 level

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol 3, No 10, 2012

59

Table 2 Correlation Matrix of Personality Traits, Spiritual Intelligence and Well Being

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 E 1

2 A .008 1

3 C .145 .177 1

4 N -.195* -.277 -.213* 1

5 O -.083 .073 .008 .127 1

6 WB .105 .098 .292** -.227* .041 1

7 CET 0.65 .149 .124 -.162 .011 .022 1

8 PMP .022 .256** .144 -.223* -.013 .078 .378** 1

9 TA .080 .146 .108 -.177 -.198* -.148 .503** .423** 1

10 CSE .000 .114 .217* -.168 -.066 .050 .296** .488** .487** 1

11 SI -.067 .161 .029 -.166 -.084 -.002 .165 .115 .229* .195* 1

*significant at .05 level **significant at .01 level

Table 3 Prediction of Well Being based on Personality Traits and Spiritual Intelligence

Criterion Variable: Well Being

Predictor Variable Beta (β) Significance

Extraversion .026 .780

Agreeableness .012 .897

Conscientiousness .249 .009

Neuroticism -.185 .061

Openness .009 .925

CET .066 .533

PMP .070 .522

TA -.293 .015

CSE .052 .639

SI -.002 .984

This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,

Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access

Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is

Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.

More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage:

http://www.iiste.org

The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and

collaborating with academic institutions around the world. Prospective authors of

IISTE journals can find the submission instruction on the following page:

http://www.iiste.org/Journals/

The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified

submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the

readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than

those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the

journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.

IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners

EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open

Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische

Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial

Library , NewJour, Google Scholar